Admin, Finance, Members, Ratings, Crowds, Policies - its the 2016 AFL v NRL v ARU v FFA v BBL thread

[Colonial]

I look at it like this, it is a big brother, little brother relationship, NSW being the big brother and alleged world home of the game, QLd being the little brother and cheeky upstart that needs to be swatted down, similar to the football relationships between Vic, WA and SA.

It was every kids dream ( or most ) to play football - of whatever kind, in the home of the game or test themselves against the best, for QLD kids it was no doubt in Sydney, just as SA and WA boys to head to the big smoke in Melbourne.

What has become quite clear ( well to me anyway) is that Sydney is no longer the real home of the game, it appears to be just in name only, it must be quite disappointing for all these QLD boys and country boys to head to Sydney and find that there is probably more support for the game outside Sydney and seems to be far more in QLD anyway.

Maybe QLD passion is bullshit, but they certainly appear more passionate than NSW.

We show up after losing 11 of 12. They were struggling with 3 losses in a row....

On SM-G920I using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Colonial]

Untrue.

2000 Qld played Lang Park - sold out.
2001 Qld played at Lang Park and ANZ. Both sold out
2002 Qld played at ANZ. Sold out.
2003 Qld moved back to Lang Park after redevelopment. Sold out.
Sold out since.

When are you saying they struggled?

They did struggle. Was there and remember it. They did end up selling ut but it didnt look like they would.

On SM-G920I using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Hoops]

Can you clarify the double counting issue for me?

I don't believe for one second the big media buyers don't have the best info available & would not accept something as easily fixable as double counting.

My issue is with comparing the codes nationally whilst ignoring the 4th biggest TV market, as I replied to Wookie when he posted details of changes to the ratings procedures.

who said they don't fix something like double counting. It certainly exists.

 

[bombersfan4000]

Typical Sydney centric article designed to inflame RL code war rhetoric.

Meh

The differentials in crowd sizes, membership etc between the AFL and NRL in Sydney have been like this for many years.

The code is kept afloat because of QLD passion and the news corp Broncos.

Fixed

 

[jatz14]

Can you clarify the double counting issue for me?

I don't believe for one second the big media buyers don't have the best info available & would not accept something as easily fixable as double counting.

My issue is with comparing the codes nationally whilst ignoring the 4th biggest TV market, as I replied to Wookie when he posted details of changes to the ratings procedures.

Late reply, but I just discovered Wookies excellent summation of the issue here. http://www.footyindustry.com/?page_id=502 As Wookie says, the 2 agencies say they have separate data bases, but on Wookies list, there are over 20 postcodes listed for both sets of data. How are they reconciling that? Because if there is 1 set of boxes, and they both post results from those boxes, or if there are 2 sets of boxes, then the postcode is counted twice. The only way it cannot be counted twice is if there is 1 set of boxes, but each box is only counted in 1 data set. Personally I think that the least likely option, but I am just basing that on opinion.

 

[Garlic muncher]

Fixed

I would have thought that the weaker RL is in Sydney, the weaker it will eventually become in Brisbane.

If by chance GWS starts filling out Spotless and membership starts to look like it will be capped, and possibly capped at around 21k to allow a couple of K opposition supporters etc tickets and walk ups, which Subi does and i imagine Adelaide oval as well, then the AFL would have to seriously look at a third Sydney team which would once again dilute the strength of RL in Sydney.

Get Sydney and Brisbane will just fall into line is possibly the thinking.

 

[Gigantor]

I would have thought that the weaker RL is in Sydney, the weaker it will eventually become in Brisbane.

If by chance GWS starts filling out Spotless and membership starts to look like it will be capped, and possibly capped at around 21k to allow a couple of K opposition supporters etc tickets and walk ups, which Subi does and i imagine Adelaide oval as well, then the AFL would have to seriously look at a third Sydney team which would once again dilute the strength of RL in Sydney.

Get Sydney and Brisbane will just fall into line is possibly the thinking.

Geez people, can we let things settle a bit before we start talking about 3rd Sydney teams??

 

[Garlic muncher]

Geez people, can we let things settle a bit before we start talking about 3rd Sydney teams??

Fair enough, lol, I am looking a fair way down the track though, what I do know though is the AFL would of course love to be in this position and logically to be the market leader on the East Coast like they claim they want.

There is no way that than can happen with only 2 Sydney teams.

 

[The_Wookie]

For those wondering about these sort of things, Ive spent some time adding in missing ratings ie. regionals and some metro dating for the AFL, both that and NZ for the NRL based on both this years and last years ratings data, and generally using a complicated system of averages referenced to the fixture. *sigh*

That data would indicate that on total ratings the NRL is ahead of the AFL by about 10 million ratings viewers, although i stress that using the averages - especially the amount required to bring the AFL data up to scratch is likely to be rather innaccurate.

ref:
http://footyindustry.com/files/afl/media/tvratings/2016/2016AFLRatings_estimated.png
http://footyindustry.com/files/nrl/media/tvratings/2016/2016NRLRatings_estimated_FW1.png

 

[Demonoid]

Fair enough, lol, I am looking a fair way down the track though, what I do know though is the AFL would of course love to be in this position and logically to be the market leader on the East Coast like they claim they want.

There is no way that than can happen with only 2 Sydney teams.

Muncher, as we have discussed on another thread, once the giants start selling out regularly, you'd then look at increasing the capacity at spotless by completing the stadium around. That would get it anywhere from 30 - 40k depending on the size of the stand. Once they start continuously selling that upgraded stadium out, perhaps they can start thinking about a third team. In any case I think its at least a decade or more away.

 

[precarious]

Sat TV #AFL arvo #AFLFinals #AFLSwansGIANTS Seven 724k (Syd 157k Mel 359k Ade 102k Per 105k) 7mate Bri 66k ----- 790

Sat TV #AFL night #AFLFinals #AFLCrowsNorth Seven 633k (Mel 414k Ade 219k) 7mate 137k (Syd 22k Bri 33k Per 83k) ---- 770

Sat TV #NRL QF1 Nine #NRLFinals 459k (Syd 264k Bri 195k) Gem 45k (Mel 17k Ade 6k Per 22k) -------504

Sat TV #NRL QF2 Nine #NRLFinals 593k (Syd 249k Mel 74k Bri 270k) Gem 19k (Ade 5k Per 13k) ------ 522

Hmmmmmm

The demos for the Swans v Giants game for Sydney FTA were quite encouraging in the context of expansion having a generational dimension. The youngest demo was nearly a 50-50 split between the Sydney AFL audience and the Sydney NRL audience for QF2 (there are no demos available for QF1 due to its lower ratings nationally):

Sydney Overall: AFL 157k; NRL QF2 249k (NB. QF1 was 264k in Sydney)
Sydney 25-54: AFL 70k; NRL 111k
Sydney 18-49: AFL 61k; NRL 101k
Sydney 16-39: AFL: 36k; NRL 38k

http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2016/09/saturday-10-september-2016.html

More generally, the NRL's relative strength in regional ratings and relative weakness in metro ratings may partly reflect a gradual aging of its audience. The young are more likely to move from country to city for work, and retirees are more likely to move the other way. Any metro growth the AFL can achieve will eventually be reflected in regional ratings of the future.

 

[precarious]

The raw differences in metro ratings between AFL and NRL actually understate the benefit to Seven.

Friday night network shares: Seven: 40.1; Nine: 25.4
Saturday night network shares: Seven 37.1; Nine: 28.7

A key factor is that AFL games are fifty percent longer. The AFL's higher averages apply to longer blocks of time.

 

[jatz14]

For those wondering about these sort of things, Ive spent some time adding in missing ratings ie. regionals and some metro dating for the AFL, both that and NZ for the NRL based on both this years and last years ratings data, and generally using a complicated system of averages referenced to the fixture. *sigh*

That data would indicate that on total ratings the NRL is ahead of the AFL by about 10 million ratings viewers, although i stress that using the averages - especially the amount required to bring the AFL data up to scratch is likely to be rather innaccurate.

ref:
http://footyindustry.com/files/afl/media/tvratings/2016/2016AFLRatings_estimated.png
http://footyindustry.com/files/nrl/media/tvratings/2016/2016NRLRatings_estimated_FW1.png

I have always compared them to assess the relative health of the audience of the major domestic competitions, and for that end, the figures for junior international RL matches, female exhibition matches, and NZ are not really relevant.
I have taken your figures and calculated the pure home and away totals for both codes, excluding finals, and all non domestic league matches.
AFL = 98.49 million, NRL = 95.88 million
Average per game AFL = 497 400, NRL = 479 400

Personally would consider that within a bees whisker, and is close enough that in a dick measuring contest, everyone's dick will be biggest, depending on how you measure it.

 

[The_Wookie]

I have always compared them to assess the relative health of the audience of the major domestic competitions, and for that end, the figures for junior international RL matches, female exhibition matches, and NZ are not really relevant.
I have taken your figures and calculated the pure home and away totals for both codes, excluding finals, and all non domestic league matches.
AFL = 98.49 million, NRL = 95.88 million
Average per game AFL = 497 400, NRL = 479 400

Personally would consider that within a bees whisker, and is close enough that in a dick measuring contest, everyone's dick will be biggest, depending on how you measure it.

NZ is worth more than 100 million to the NRL bottom line over the life of its deal. Its not massive but its not insignificant.

 

[footyfan1978]

Geez people, can we let things settle a bit before we start talking about 3rd Sydney teams??

I agree, maybe Wagga Wagga Warriors can be looked at in a decade or two.

 

[Kwality]

For those wondering about these sort of things, Ive spent some time adding in missing ratings ie. regionals and some metro dating for the AFL, both that and NZ for the NRL based on both this years and last years ratings data, and generally using a complicated system of averages referenced to the fixture. *sigh*

That data would indicate that on total ratings the NRL is ahead of the AFL by about 10 million ratings viewers, although i stress that using the averages - especially the amount required to bring the AFL data up to scratch is likely to be rather innaccurate.

ref:
http://footyindustry.com/files/afl/media/tvratings/2016/2016AFLRatings_estimated.png
http://footyindustry.com/files/nrl/media/tvratings/2016/2016NRLRatings_estimated_FW1.png

Work in progress

 

[Kwality]

NZ is worth more than 100 million to the NRL bottom line over the life of its deal. Its not massive but its not insignificant.

care to guesstimate the relative value between the codes of the regionals ?

 

[Kwality]

I have always compared them to assess the relative health of the audience of the major domestic competitions, and for that end, the figures for junior international RL matches, female exhibition matches, and NZ are not really relevant.
I have taken your figures and calculated the pure home and away totals for both codes, excluding finals, and all non domestic league matches.
AFL = 98.49 million, NRL = 95.88 million
Average per game AFL = 497 400, NRL = 479 400

Personally would consider that within a bees whisker, and is close enough that in a dick measuring contest, everyone's dick will be biggest, depending on how you measure it.

My interest was piqued by the differing claims on viewers for the Grand Finals years ago now, how AFL fans in Vic (my local media) were fed numbers that indicated the AFL Grand Final was #1 but there were similar claims for the NRL, so I went looking & found the 4th largest TV market was not Perth.

 

[Garlic muncher]

My interest was piqued by the differing claims on viewers for the Grand Finals years ago now, how AFL fans in Vic (my local media) were fed numbers that indicated the AFL Grand Final was #1 but there were similar claims for the NRL, so I went looking & found the 4th largest TV market was not Perth.

So why don't they just join all NSW rural together in one market - instead of Northern and Southern NSW ?

Can you explain that ?, why don't they just make rural Australia all one market ?, alternatively why don't they split NNSW into 5 markets ?.

 

[Kwality]

So why don't they just join all NSW rural together in one market - instead of Northern and Southern NSW ?

Can you explain that ?, why don't they just make rural Australia all one market ?, alternatively why don't they split NNSW into 5 markets ?.

Its what the TV industry wanted is my guess of why its measured the way it is - probably nothing to do with footy codes. Perhaps ownership of the FTA licences outside the capital cities was a driver ...

 

[The_Wookie]

care to guesstimate the relative value between the codes of the regionals ?

Not particularly. But lets go down this route anyway - note the figures below only account for FTA regional viewing and not the Fox regional viewers.

Current AFL deal - total 1.25 billion

• $425 million cash paid by the Seven network over 5 years ending in 2016.
• Annual Cash = 85 million.
• Regional Ratings = 22.26% of the total (using the estimates here)
• Annual Regional Ratings value = 22.26% of 85 million = 18.921 million per annum or 94.605 million over 5 years.

Current NRL deal - total estimated at 1.125 billion (with NZ)

• Nines share of the 925 million cash from Fox and Nine in 2012 is estimated at 95 million per year.
• Regional ratings = 39.46% of the total (using the estimates here)
• Annual Regional Ratings value = 39.46% of 95 million = 37.49 million per annum or 187.43 million over 5 years.

Note that the regional percentage of the NRL before this year was closer to 30% than 39%. A big downturn in metro viewing as viewers transitioned to Fox has resulted in regionals taking a far greater percentage of the FTA viewing market.

The other issue here is that the AFL with 12 million more in Metro viewing audiences would likely make up for the deficit in regional viewers in terms of revenue given the assumption that 12 million metro viewers are worth more to advertisers and networks than 12 million regional viewers.

 

[Garlic muncher]

Its what the TV industry wanted is my guess of why its measured the way it is - probably nothing to do with footy codes. Perhaps ownership of the FTA licences outside the capital cities was a driver ...

Considering you are such a devotee of rural ratings areas that encompass thousands of hectares I would have thought you would know the answer.

 

[Kwality]

Not particularly. But lets go down this route anyway - note the figures below only account for FTA regional viewing and not the Fox regional viewers.

Current AFL deal - total 1.25 billion

• $425 million cash paid by the Seven network over 5 years ending in 2016.
• Annual Cash = 85 million.
• Regional Ratings = 22.26% of the total (using the estimates here)
• Annual Regional Ratings value = 22.26% of 85 million = 18.921 million per annum or 94.605 million over 5 years.

Current NRL deal - total estimated at 1.125 billion (with NZ)

• Nines share of the 925 million cash from Fox and Nine in 2012 is estimated at 95 million per year.
• Regional ratings = 39.46% of the total (using the estimates here)
• Annual Regional Ratings value = 39.46% of 95 million = 37.49 million per annum or 187.43 million over 5 years.

Note that the regional percentage of the NRL before this year was closer to 30% than 39%. A big downturn in metro viewing as viewers transitioned to Fox has resulted in regionals taking a far greater percentage of the FTA viewing market.

The other issue here is that the AFL with 12 million more in Metro viewing audiences would likely make up for the deficit in regional viewers in terms of revenue given the assumption that 12 million metro viewers are worth more to advertisers and networks than 12 million regional viewers.

... well done, and demonstrates (albeit estimated) why, when comparing the ratings AFL/NRL, regionals should be included, not just the capitals, as has been the point of my concern.

When it comes to the advertising value city v regional, I accept your broad assumption - perhaps it may be offset by the number of high rating (top 10) League games boosted by Origin.

 

[Kwality]

Considering you are such a devotee of rural ratings areas that encompass thousands of hectares I would have thought you would know the answer.

My interest is more ASX related than footy. The mighty dollar does tend to sharpen my thinking.

 

[Garlic muncher]

My interest is more ASX related than footy. The mighty dollar does tend to sharpen my thinking.

I can clearly understand a stand alone city being used for ratings purposes, it stands out like a sore thumb, but I fail to see the overall relevance of a rural area encompassing thousands of acres, if that was the case why not just have one giant rural ratings area - like the whole of Australia - and what is the actual point in splitting NSW ?